From the North to Kent: Selbys and Ightham Mote, 1591-1641

The author is a Senior Collections & House Officer for the National Trust, based at Ightham Mote, near Sevenoaks, Kent. He has drawn on several sources including Archaeologia Cantiana, Kent Archives, Calendars of State, Foreign, Border and Cecil Papers; and other materials form the National Archives. The Selbys of Northumberland held important administrative, pol- itical and military influence in the North and this is traced into their settlement in Kent. The article discusses the Selby family’s role in the events of the reigns of Elizabeth I and James VI & I and the significance of the county of Kent and their manor at Ightham Mote. This subject was explored in the ‘Selby Spies’ exhibition at Ightham Mote in 2024, in which the author was co-curator.

Originally based in County durham, Northumberland and berwick-upon-tweed, the Selby family held many important and influential positions in the North of England across the Tudor and Stuart periods. They served the Crown by enforcing order in the unruly borderlands between england and Scotland, in posts that included: gentleman Porter of berwick Castle and deputy Warden of the east March. By 1582 these roles brought them into contact with Elizabeth I’s chief ministers: Sir Francis Walsingham, principal secretary and head of the Privy Council, and Lord Burghley, High Treasurer and later Privy Seal. In return for information, services, and loyalty, the Selbys were given personal favours and financial rewards from these powerful patrons, leading to Captain William Selby’s acquisition of the manor and estate of Ightham Mote in Kent in 1591. For the rest of Elizabeth I’s reign and after the accession of James VI & I, Captain William and his nephew, Master William Selby, split time between official duties in the North and their new lands in Kent, where they both eventually relocated and resided for the remainder of the lives (Fig.1).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 1 Photograph of Ightham Mote. The property’s exterior was largely unaltered after the 16th century. All images © National Trust Images.|Image[/fg]

There were numerous branches of the Selby family. One grouping of the family, who are the sole focus of this piece, are best described as the ‘Berwick line’[fn1] which began with John Selby the elder, who served as Gentleman Porter from 1551-1565 and Deputy Warden of the East March. John the elder had three sons, the first two playing a major role in the upward trajectory of the family and the eventual connection with Kent: John Selby the younger, born c. 1530; William Selby, born c. 1532; and Ralph Selby, the youngest son whose date of birth is unknown but was likely in the mid-1530s.[fn2] The elder John Selby’s appointment as Gentleman Porter represented the first step in the rising fortunes and influence of the family, the [pg202]office coming with an annuity of £20 per annum and control of access to the town. The younger John Selby married in 1556 and his eldest son, William Selby, was born c. 1556-1557 and was hereafter referred to as ‘the younger’ or as ‘Master’. Like his father and his uncle of the same name, the younger William Selby would play a crucial role in the family’s continued rise in the North, connections with national figures and resulting involvement in Kent.

Seeking patrons 1582-1586

The Selby family’s upward trajectory, earned through service in administrative and military positions in the North of england, was recognised and extended further through the knighthood granted to John Selby the younger in 1582.[fn3] Sir John’s correspondence with Lord Burghley and Sir Francis Walsingham reveals the services that the Selbys provided these dominant figures in the affairs of state. In September 1582, Sir John replied to a letter first sent by Burghley, affirming that he would supply the information requested on ‘occurants as shall happen in Scotland’. Considering the distance between London and the North, along with the increasing threat of plots surrounding the captive Mary, Queen of Scots, and the potential for hostility from Scotland, the Selbys were one of many families that met Burghley and Walsingham’s need for loyalty, information and control in these remote corners of England. This reflected the importance of the gentry to the governance of faraway counties and how Elizabeth’s councillors sought to strengthen the security of the realm through oversight in even the remotest regions and localities. The correspondence reveals the Selby family’s earliest willingness to provide useful and discreet information to the key figures in Elizabethan government.

[pg203]In April 1584, Master William Selby wrote to Walsingham to thank him for an ‘underserved favour’ when he was last at court. Predictably, Master William offered to ‘show service of deeds’ and assured Walsingham that his father, Sir John, ‘has sent as much news as could be got from Scotland’.[fn4] Eager to please their new patron after his son, master William, ‘maid report to me how honorably you have dealbt with hym at his last being in Court’, Sir John Selby wrote to Walsingham assuring him that ‘we are bounde by our selves and our frendes to serve your honor’.[fn5] The fact that Master William was travelling to court and was received by Walsingham, along with the Selby family’s eagerness to declare their loyalty to Walsingham, appears to be part of conscious and concerted efforts to establish and develop relations with the most important and powerful figures in the Queen’s government.

Sir Francis Walsingham formed a wide network of agents and intelligencers, motivated in part by religious fervour and political ambitions, but ultimately centred on a commitment to royal service.[fn6] By the 1580s, the Selbys were keen to project their alignment with Walsingham’s Protestantism and his efforts to ensure the security of the realm. The knowledge and influence the family had at their disposal, through their official positions in the North and their proximity to Scotland, was clearly valued by Walsingham at this time of plots against the Queen’s life and threats to the sovereignty of her realm. This tense political climate that prevailed across the 1580s was an environment that brought the Selbys into more direct service for Walsingham (Fig. 2).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 2 Engraving of Sir Francis Walsingham. From a catalogue of pictures by British artists in the possession of Sir John Fleming Leicester, Bart, now in Ightham Mote’s library. By John Young, engraver in mezzotinto to His Majesty, and keeper of the British Institution (1821).|Image[/fg]

Scandals, intervention and rewards 1586-1588.

Walsingham offered his patronage to a wide array of individuals and groups, some of whom would be indebted to him and be bound to provide underhand services in return. Maureen Meikle attested to the underground nature of their service to Walsingham, writing that their service ‘usually entailed sending spy reports’.[fn7] Though some of their work could be classified as such, the vagueness of this term does risk overemphasizing the extent of their involvement in espionage and downplaying the importance of their official posts in the services they provided their patrons. Nonetheless, some of information that the Selbys provided Walsingham was of a discreet nature; but it is difficult to judge how much this conflicted with their official duties or jeopardised their standing and safety.

The Selbys became embroiled in controversy in 1586, when a troop of men from the berwick garrison led by master William were the aggressors in a fatal clash with members of two rival families in the North: the Collingwoods and Claverings. Sir John Forster reported the event to Walsingham; he wrote that on 6 December 1586 his party were ‘returning home towards Newcastle, were met by William son of Sir John Selby and his men, who frayed upon them, and most cruelly murdered Wm. Clavering’.[fn8] Proceedings lingered into the next years’, when Sir John Selby pleaded the family’s side to Walsingham in April 1588, writing that ‘We always have desired and still desire a good end of this trouble, and reconciliation with our neighbours’. Implicitly, this hinted that some form of agreement had already been broached, and the subsequent correspondence reveals that Walsingham personally intervened on behalf of the Selbys in this manslaughter case. Sir John Selby [pg204][pg205]wrote again on 3 August 1588, in thanks for ‘ending of my son’s troubles’.[fn9] This event signals one way that Walsingham would attain extraordinary loyalty and commitment through his patronage, focusing on aligned figures connected to the areas he wished to gain knowledge of and control in.

Not only did Walsingham offer his agents a lifeline in times of crisis, but he also provided prospects for personal and political advancement. Within the same letter from August 1588 that revealed this extraordinary favour, Sir John Selby thanked Walsingham for his ‘furtherance in obtaining of his wife’ for his eldest son, Master William, who had just been pardoned in this manslaughter case.[fn10] The bride was Dorothy Bonham, a wealthy heiress from Town Malling in Kent.[fn11] A striking full-length portrait of Dorothy, painted around this time in the latest court fashions, depicts this eligible young woman ready to enter a life of influence. Executed in the manner of Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger, with a visible likening to Queen Elizabeth herself, the portrait visualises the political connections and social sophistication of members of the Kentish gentry, with fashions extending out of court and into the affluent shires surrounding London (Fig. 3).[fn12]

[fg]jpg|Fig. 3 Portrait of Dorothy Bonham in the manner of Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger,|Image[/fg]

This contrasted sharply with the Selby family’s surroundings in the North, which were not as unruly and backwards as contemporaries so regularly portrayed but were certainly more remote and detached from the political and cultural centre in London. Walsingham’s familial connections in Kent, being born at or near his family’s manor, Scadbury Hall in Chislehurst, Kent, likely exerted some influence in how and why this match was made. The marriage between a northern gentleman and a wealthy heiress from Kent was far from typical in both counties, nonetheless this arrangement presented the Selbys with enormous opportunities.[fn13] William Selby’s marriage to Dorothy Bonham clearly cemented the family connections with Kent. This new and unlikely connection to Kent, springing out of this extraordinary relationship with Walsingham, offered the Selbys tremendous prospects for further advancement which they quickly capitalised on.

Concurrently, in September 1588, Captain William Selby was selected as a Member of Parliament for Berwick. His election attested to the esteem the family had garnered in the North through their official posts as well as the importance of their connections with powerful courtiers.

Entry into kent 1588-1591

Through their relationship with Walsingham and their increasing progression in official positions, the Selbys had become connected to the county of Kent by the end of the 1580s. The death of Sir Francis Walsingham in April 1590 reshaped the dynamics in Elizabeth’s government and court. Equally, it also ended the Selby family’s connection to their powerful patron. Lord Burghley had remained at Elizabeth’s side as her chief advisor across the 1580s, but now wished that his son, Robert Cecil, would fill Walsingham’s former position as principal secretary.[fn14] Following Walsingham’s passing, the Selbys continued to reap the benefits of their previous patronage and gradually renewed their relationship with the Cecils.

the marriage of master William Selby and dorothy bonham, arranged by Walsingham in 1588, marked the family’s first direct involvement in Kent. However, this new tie did not automatically bring them to Kent. The newlyweds [pg206]did not relocate to the South, revealed by a post-nuptial agreement for Dorothy ‘now wife of William’ that centred on the Selby family’s posts and landholdings in County Durham, Northumberland and Berwick. This coincides with their continued activity and appointment to new offices in the North into the 1590s.[fn15] [pg207]

Nonetheless, Captain William Selby’s new position as MP for Berwick brought him to London. As MPs represented a particular town or shire from across the land, many gentlemen travelled to London to take up political offices. Resultingly, many needed temporary accommodation for the time they spent in the city.[fn16] It is likely that Captain William would have needed a similar arrangement, at least at the start of his tenure in Westminster. Before 1588, it is unlikely that either William Selby spent any prolonged period in London, previously visiting to relay messages or for meetings in and around court. The will of the elder William Selby revealed that he held leases for two dwellings in London: one in St Gregory’s by St Paul’s and the other in St Sepulchre-Without-Newgate, though the start date of these tenancies is not known.[fn17] Regardless, his presence in London afforded the family greater status and opportunities and meant he was physically present in the South.

It was out of the political crisis and religious conflict of the 1580s, the same issues that brought them into close contact with the chief ministers of government, that the Selbys obtained Ightham Mote. Captain William Selby undertook his acquisition of the Mote in 1591, first taking on the debts of its then owner, Charles Alleyn, and securing the full transfer of the house by 1592.[fn18] The finances and connections he gained from his military career had already supported his elevation into Parliament, now Captain William was well positioned to take on a substantial manor in Kent. As a second son, Captain William Selby had forged his own path through military service. As a result, he had less involvement and communication with Walsingham and Burghley in the 1580s. Yet, he still benefited from the family’s overall relationship with the chief ministers. The fact the Mote was known to him and was available at this specific time hinged on outside forces. Meikle proposed that the Selby family’s connections in government ‘may account for the advantageous mortgage’ at a cost £4,000.[fn19] As Walsingham died in April 1590 and Captain William did not take over the property until 30 June 1591, the dates are somewhat conflicting.[fn20] Nevertheless, the Selby family’s connections in government and Captain William’s presence in the South placed the family in the right circumstances to acquire Ightham Mote.

Between Kent and the north 1591-1600

Although Captain William Selby acquired Ightham mote in 1591, he did not permanently reside in Kent until the end of the 1590s. In 1593, Captain William was returned to the next session of Parliament.[fn21] He was also recorded in the court rolls in the village of Ightham in April 1593, in a case where he impounded a trespassing passer-by. This local disturbance does not reveal whether Captain William was permanently residing in Kent, but it does indicate points where he was present in the years immediately after his acquisition.[fn22] It is likely that Captain William split time between London, as MP for Berwick, his new estate in Kent as well as in the family’s stronghold in the North. Following the death of Sir John Selby in 1595, Captain William filled his elder brother’s former post as Gentleman Porter of Berwick Castle becoming the third member of the family to attain this position.

With his new position as gentleman Porter requiring his presence in the garrison at Berwick, Captain William appeared more frequently and actively in the North [pg208]from 1595 onwards. Despite this, the Selbys were once again at the fore of an outbreak of violence with a rival family in the North, this time coming to blows with the Gray family in 1597. Even though he was aged of sixty-five, Captain William was involved in a brawl with Edward Gray of Morpeth in a Berwick churchyard.[fn23] These events were part of a wider power struggle in the North, akin to those that the Selbys were embroiled in across the 1580s. This time, the Selbys appealed to Lord Burghley for favour and intervention, Captain William requesting exemption from his duties due to ‘his own and the town’s unfitness’. Captain William’s seniority was catching up with him, but his interests in Kent and elsewhere were also likely advancing his wish to retire, writing to Burghley that his duties brought ‘loss unto me concerning my businesses’ and were ‘very hurtful for my health.’[fn24] Although he was not granted permission, the family’s attention had already partly turned southward again when Captain William returned to Parliament and master William was selected to represent Northumberland as MP from August 1597.[fn25] Captain William was eventually relieved of his duties, receiving permission for his nephew, Master William, to fill his post in Berwick by August 1599, making him joint Gentleman Porter.[fn26] In failing health, Captain William had finally secured official sanction for his relocation to Kent by 1600.

Taking on his new role by 1600, master William experienced much of the animosity that pushed forward his uncle’s retirement as Gentleman Porter. He raised his grievances to Sir Robert Cecil, requesting leave from Berwick in August 1600. Master William was keen to impress Cecil with declarations of loyalty to the aging Queen Elizabeth, writing that he would ‘without regard of present or future peril, worship the sun shining’.[fn27] Master William’s attention returned to the services he may offer the new leading Secretary of State and the rewards he could reap from this connection. Master William had his plea rejected by Cecil, but reportedly absented himself to Kent anyway. Complaints were levied about both William’s absences from the Berwick garrisons from 1598 to 1601, with both uncle and nephew casting an eye on their interests in London and Kent. Both men had some reason to be in the South, serving in Parliament again in 1601. Master William spoke on bills regarding tillage and enclosure, arguing that Northumberland should be exempted.[fn28] At this time, master William followed the example set by his uncle across the 1590s, splitting time between his official duties in the North, his political involvement in Parliament as well as his familial and financial interests in Kent. Captain William was settled in Kent, showing up again in the local court rolls in april 1602 for allowing ‘his sullage to lie in the highway leading from Ivie hatch to Buds plaine’.[fn29] Master William’s letters to Cecil alluded to his presence in Kent, but we do not know exactly when or where he was residing in the county. It is plausible that Master William and his wife, Dorothy, spent time at Ightham Mote, considering the size of the property along with the fact that Captain William was unmarried and childless. Equally, Master William’s reason for spending more time in Kent after 1600 was also linked to his wife’s family estates in Town Malling, of which she was heiress.[fn30] Nonetheless, potentially with knowledge from his relationship with Cecil or from his presence in Parliament and contacts at court, master William returned to berwick in the last months of Elizabeth’s reign.[fn31] Even in the last days of her life, the Queen had not named a successor. Striving for stability and continuity through a Protestant [pg209]succession, Cecil had made secret arrangements with James VI of Scotland.[fn32] On 24 March 1603, as the last in the Tudor line, Queen Elizabeth died. Aware of these changing tides, Master William Selby rode into Scotland and arrived at Holyrood Palace in Edinburgh on 27 March to deliver the newly acceding King James I of England the keys to Berwick. In thanks for granting James VI & I entry into his new kingdom, Master William Selby received one of the first knighthoods of the new reign.[fn33] Embarking on a long journey through England, Berwick was the first stop on James VI’s way to London. The new king bestowed honours on the magnates, gentlemen and officeholders of the counties he passed through. King James and Cecil, his new Secretary of State, deployed patronage across the land to preserve continuity amidst this time of dynastic change. James VI & I travelled slowly, ensuring he arrived in London after the funeral of Elizabeth I. It was crucial that he was not upstaged by the grand finale to the Elizabethan age. Marking this end of an era, Captain William was knighted at Greenwich on 10 June for his service as an Esquire of the Body at the funeral of Queen Elizabeth I.[fn34] With the english throne passing from the Tudors to the Stuarts, the Selbys had secured a final reward for their service to the Crown and its ministers across the Elizabethan period. Equally, their renewed connection with Cecil opened the family to further opportunities in the new reign.

Early Jacobean politics

Playing a notable role in the accession of James VI & I, the Selby family’s stock was high in the early years of the Jacobean period. The elder Sir William was fully retired and residing at Ightham mote and his nephew, the younger Sir William, made moves to return to Kent. Having returned to his duties in the North to usher in the new king, Sir William the younger would be a central figure in facilitating and enacting James VI’s vision of a Great Britain. Unifying both the Scottish and English crowns, James sought to turn a troublesome border which was patrolled into a peaceful shire that would be administered.[fn35] He was named a border Commissioner in 1605, a post that came with an annual salary of one hundred marks and tasked him with removing all ‘occasions of strangeness and marks of division’ in the Border counties.[fn36] This was an opportunity for further advancement and reward from Cecil and the king, the latter which he had encountered in the accession of 1603.[fn37] Equally, if he succeeded in transforming the border into a peaceful ‘Middle Shire’, this would enable him to fully relocate and retire to Kent. The younger Sir William had already obtained permission for absence from his new post at High Sheriff of Northumberland in 1604. The Selbys were certainly in the good graces of the new king and his ministers, with a warrant sent ‘to the lord Chancellor to dispense with Sir William Selby’s continual personal attendance, in his office of Sheriff of Northumberland’ from Hampton Court on 5 February 1604.[fn38] Although this was a new position for Sir William the younger, he had affairs in Kent, likely relating to his wife’s estates in Town Malling, and the duties of this role were undertaken by a previous holder of the post.[fn39] In the same year, he stepped down from his position as Gentleman Porter and was awarded a lucrative annuity of £184 135s. 4d.[fn40] In this first year of James VI & I’s reign, the Selbys appeared to reap the rewards of their past and present service. The younger Sir William looked set to retire from his official positions in the North and ready to [pg210]permanently join his uncle in Kent. Despite this, England would soon return to a state of emergency in the lead-up to and aftermath of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605. The younger Sir William’s inside knowledge and experience of affairs in the North would force him to resume his active service on the Border in this time of crisis.

Though he had previously been permitted leave from his duties in the North in 1604, the younger Sir William was keen to show his commitment upon his return. He wrote to Cecil, who had now been elevated as Earl of Salisbury, to emphasise his dedication to the king’s cause. In this letter from 21 August 1605, he stated that he had been ‘in the North for 3 weeks with my wife and the greatest part of my family, whom I brought out of Kent that I might wholly give myself to this service without distraction.’[fn41] they returned to the North before the gunpowder Plot was discovered on 5 November 1605, with tensions and suspicions rising in the leadup to the opening of Parliament. A longstanding local legend made a link between the Selbys and the foiling of the plot, though subsequent findings in the Cecil Papers rebuke this as unlikely.

Around the same time, the Selbys had crucial affairs to attend to in London regarding the estate at Ightham Mote. The original complications surrounding the acquisition of Ightham Mote in 1591 had not been resolved and a bill to ‘assure and confirm the Manor of Moate, in the County of Kent’ was introduced to Parliament on 28 March 1607. The elder Sir William had maintained his place in the House of Commons despite now living in Kent, representing Berwick from 1604-1610, in the first session of James I’s reign.[fn42] The bill was read on 30 March and committees met in the Middle Temple Hall and Court of Wards between April and June. The bill was deferred on 22 June as some error was found and it does not appear in the records again, attesting to the original ambiguities in the ownership and debts of the Alleyns in 1591.[fn43] Equally, the bill was likely raised as the elder Sir William sought to put this estate and inheritance in order, with his last will and testament following in 1610. The will included lands and properties in the North as well as those in Kent and London, but it confirms that the estate was held by the elder Sir William Selby and was deemed as his ‘Capitall messuage’. The ‘mannour house with the appurtenances called the mote’ was bequeathed to his ‘Loveing nephew’ the younger Sir William Selby who was also the executor of the will. Although this recognized Ightham Mote as the elder Sir William’s primary residence and estate, he left the mayor and bailiffs of Berwick his property and land in the town for use of a ‘free schoole.’[fn44] The elder Sir William Selby died on 1 January 1612 and was buried in Kent at St Peter’s Church, Ightham.[fn45] While he had resided at Ightham Mote for over a decade and died in Kent, the elder Sir William’s connections to the North clearly remained prominent for his entire life (Fig. 4).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 4 Sir William Selby the elder. From his alabaster effigy at St Peter’s Church, Ightham, Kent, where he is buried. Dressed in armour and groomed in Elizabethan fashions.|Image[/fg]

Relocation to Kent and renovation of Ightham Mote 1612-1633

The younger Sir William Selby’s inheritance to Ightham Mote marked he and his wife’s full and permanent relocation to Kent, finally stepping down from active service in the North. The Selby succession was recognised in the Ightham court rolls on 7 October 1612, recording the elder Sir William had ‘died since the last Court’ and that his nephew ‘should enjoy the premises, by virtue of the last will of the said William, senior’.[fn46] Likely having spent considerable time in Kent prior [pg211][pg212]to his uncle’s passing, just as he had done at various points since the late 1590s, his relocation to his ‘newly-inherited Kentish estate’ was also noted by Scottish officials in October 1612.[fn47] Sir William and Dame Dorothy Selby quickly developed social connections with the nearby county gentry and nobility. By 1616, Dame Dorothy was on personal terms with Lady Anne Clifford, wife of Richard Sackville, Earl of Dorset, who resided at Knole in neighbouring Sevenoaks. Both William and Dorothy Selby were named and discussed in Lady Anne Clifford’s diaries, but their connection likely predates their inclusion in her writing. Dame Dorothy was first mentioned as visiting on 28 May 1616, referred to as ‘my Lady Selby’ and discussing local conversations that suggested they were already familiar. Both Selbys are mentioned as visiting on numerous occasions across the second half of the 1610s. In January 1619 lady anne wrote that ‘here dinned Sir William and lady Selby on the ‘24th, Sunday’.[fn48] Both hailing from Northumberland, Sir William and lady Anne had also corresponded about matters relating to their native county. This mutual connection to the North explains part of the Selbys closeness to Lady Anne.[fn49] Equally, they also became integrated within the circles of other prominent families in this part of Kent through this relationship. In one example of this, Dame Dorothy stood in for Lady Anne Clifford on 6 October 1619 at the christening of the son of Sir Henry Vane of Fairlawne.[fn50] Nonetheless, the Selbys also established their own patronage networks and extended charity in the local area, funding the construction of a new aisle in Ightham parish church in 1619.[fn51]

Alongside the interior developments and social connections that Sir William and Dorothy Selby made shortly after inheriting Ightham Mote, surviving material culture provides us with a picture of the events that led them to Ightham and the life they led once they settled here. Dame Dorothy spent much of her time on needlework, as was common for ladies of the gentry and nobility. Typically, many of her works depicted biblical scenes, including the ‘Golden Age’, the ‘Acts of Jonah’ and the ‘Judgement of Solomon.’[fn52] Despite this, some embroideries also alluded to political symbols from the Elizabethan and early Stuart periods. The most overt example of this was the ‘Double Deliverance’, which was based on an engraving of the same name printed by the Puritan minister Samuel Ward in 1621. This engraving and the subsequent embroideries depicted the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 and the foiling of the Gunpowder Plot in 1605, portraying divine providence on the side of England and the Protestant faith.[fn53] Ward’s piece was tied to the rising tide of anti-Spanish feeling in the early 1620s. Dame Dorothy’s embroidery would have been completed sometime after Ward’s engraving, at some point in the 1620s or 1630s. Such overt and contemporary political matters were rarely covered by women, however at least two other examples of matching embroideries also survive today.[fn54] As multiple versions were made by different people, Dorothy’s work was likely influenced by this wave of public opinion. Yet, Dorothy’s embroidery also stands a testament to the pride the Selby family placed on their political connections and involvement during these pivotal moments in the reigns of Elizabeth I and James VI & I. All this considered, Dorothy and her contemporaries were conscious of the extraordinary nature of the events that had unfolded in their own lifetimes, with these memories playing a substantial role in how they occupied themselves and saw their lives (Fig. 5).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 5 ‘Double Deliverance’ embroidery by Dame Dorothy Selby. Last pictured at the ‘Old Ightham’ exhibition in the Village Hall, on Friday 23 June 1956.|Image[/fg]

[pg213]

The final years 1625-1641

On 7 March 1625 the unified English and Scottish thrones passed to the second Stuart king, following the death of James VI & I and the succession of his son as Charles I.[fn55] The Selbys saw the continued and accelerated changes that characterised this reign, feeling the effects of the associated social tensions, political discontent and clashes over religious differences. By 1632, Sir William was playing a small role in county governance, being selected as a Justice of the Peace for Kent.[fn56] In this same year he came under pressure from William James of Ightham Court, who accused him of favouring recusant Catholics in his role as Justice of the Peace, oppressing the poor, and neglecting the parish church. These claims seem mostly unfounded, considering the Selby family’s previous service for the Protestant cause in times of upheaval and their generous donations to St Peter’s Church in Ightham in 1619. Sir William responded to the petition and charges levied against him, noting his old age and illness.[fn57] The Selbys words did turn into action, creating a new chapel at Ightham Mote. The chapel was consecrated by the Bishop of Oxford on 13 October 1633, suggesting the conversion of the room had begun prior to this date.[fn58] The [pg214]chapel featured carved medieval pews from disused local churches as well as a barrel-vaulted ceiling painted with heraldic devices associated with Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, from the room’s previous use as a high-status Tudor guest chamber.[fn59] The ‘Berwick line’ of the Selby family were officially recognised as firm Protestants in a report on the ‘state of Northumberland for religion in the principal families’ from 1607.[fn60] Yet, many of the growing evangelical and radical stances treated private chapels with suspicion, often accusing them of hosting ‘Popish superstitions and idolatry’.[fn61] It is in this context that William James, who would be an active aid to the parliamentarian cause in the Civil Wars of 1642-1649 and in the Commonwealth period that followed, brandished heavy criticism at Sir William (Fig. 6).[fn62] Despite the opposition they faced from growing radical factions, the Selbys were not themselves pleased by the direction of politics in the 1630s. During the personal rule of Charles I, Parliament had been disbanded. The King now ruled by decree, through the Privy Council. However, with Parliament closed, the king needed to find other ways of obtaining funds. As the most notorious example in the wider effort to raise finances, the largely disused ship money tax was reintroduced and expanded to be charged in peacetime and inland areas.[fn63] In 1635, Sir William Selby was billed for £20 of ship money. This was by far the largest sum in Ightham, with William James of Ightham Court only charged £6 and the entire parish payments only amounting to £43. By this metric, the Selbys were deemed as the wealthiest household in the parish and William James was firmly in the prospering [pg215]middling sorts. Despite the Selby family’s previous steadfast loyalty to the Crown, Sir William resisted and appealed against the sum levied. The officials replied on their assessment, arguing that ‘No man in Kent is able to pay so great a sum.’ [fn64] Evidently, these growing issues, ones that led up to the Civil Wars, were felt by many of different backgrounds and leanings. Sir William challenged this charge until his death in February 1638, with the King receiving a recited petition in April of that year.[fn65] The younger Sir William had been described as a leading member of the ‘Protestant Court Party’ in the North between the 1580s and 1610s.[fn66] Here, at an earlier time of great threats to the realm and concerns about recusancy in the North, loyalty to the Crown and its chief ministers was synonymous with the protection and furtherance the Protestant cause. Yet, in a different county and over a decade later, the Selbys were faced with a different situation. The 1630s were a time of a rapidly shifting social, political and religious circumstances. The Selbys remained connected to important figures in national politics, but this existing order was now under even more significant challenge. The consecration of their private chapel had been approved by Dr John Bancroft, Bishop of Oxford, who was aligned with William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury and leader of the high church movement. Following the death of the younger Sir William Selby in 1638, Dame Dorothy received a license from the Archbishop of Canterbury to receive communion at Ightham Mote. Although ‘Primate of All England’ in the Church of England was based in Kent at Canterbury, Ightham Mote was situated in the diocese of Rochester. Nonetheless, Ightham Mote’s new chapel was first created and used at a time when consecrated spaces and the ‘beauty of holiness’ were central in the Archbishop of Canterbury’s vision for the Church of England.[fn67] In the end, the principles of the high church movement were fiercely opposed by many evangelicals and radicals who emerged as leading parliamentarians, leading to Laud’s arrest in 1640 and his execution in 1645.[fn68] By the last years of Sir William and Dame Dorothy’s lives, the king and his ministers were under great strain and scrutiny. The Selbys had been met with criticism from some neighbours, however this time they did not have the necessary connections and patrons to extend their previous successes. Even so, at this point Sir William and Dame Dorothy were able to lead a life of affluence and comfort at their Kentish estate. The younger Sir William Selby had established his last will and testament by 1637, a document which provides us with unparalleled insight into the wealth, interests and relationships he had accumulated over his lifetime. The will left Dame Dorothy in great luxury, ensuring she would stay at Ightham Mote for the rest of her life and leaving her a sum of £4,000. As Sir William and Dame Dorothy did not have any children, he established his ‘loving cousin’, George Selby of Billingsgate, as the eventual inheritor of the estate at Ightham Mote.[fn69] The will also left numerous bequests to previous acquaintances, including fellow gentleman and officials in Northern governance as well as their new and well-connected associates in the South like Sir John Sackville. The Selbys clearly still identified themselves with the North, as the younger Sir William left £4,000 to the corporation of Berwick for the construction of a church and the maintenance of a free school. Ultimately, Sir William had amassed a great wealth from his service in the North and to chief ministers, awaiting ‘money due unto thee from [pg216][pg217]the kinges majestie for in respect of my pencion graaunted unto mee by Patent for my life’.[fn70] Still, from 1612 onwards the Kentish manor took precedence over the estates in the North, just it had done for his uncle who first acquired the property. Dame Dorothy’s will of 1641 is much shorter and more locally focused than both Sir William’s wills, leaving sums, leases and duties to the nearby Amherst, Howell and Cradock families.[fn71] As the final point for these first generations of the family to live at Ightham Mote, Dame Dorothy’s will focuses less on their roots, estates and legacies in the North and reflects the Selby family’s gradual adoption of gentry life in Kent (Fig. 7).

[fg]jpg|Fig. 6 Lithograph drawing set in the new chapel at Ightham Mote, from The Mansions of England in the Olden Times by Edward Nash (1838). A Victorian imagination of how the Sir William and Dorothy Selby’s chapel may have looked.|Image[/fg]

[fg]jpg|Fig. 7 Monument to Dame Dorothy Selby in St Peter’s Church, Ightham, Kent. Sculpted by Edward Marshal (1598-1675) c. 1641.|Image[/fg]

Bibliography

Primary Sources

‘An entry in the Register of Bancroft records the consecration of a chapel at Ightham Mote on 13 October 1633’, Lambeth Palace Library (Reg Laud 1, ff. 190v-191r).

Calendar of Border Papers: Volume 1, 1560-95, ed., Joseph Bain, London (1894).

Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I, 1635, ed., John Bruce, London (1865).

Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I, 1637-8, ed., John Bruce. London (1869):

Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Elizabeth, Addenda 1580-1625. ed., Mary Anne Everett Green, London (1872).

Calendar of State Papers Domestic: James I, 1603-1610, ed., Mary Anne Everett Green, London (1857).

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 3, 1583-1589, London (1889).

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 8, 1598, ed., R. A. Roberts, London (1899).

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 17, 1605, ed., M. S. Giuseppi, London (1938).

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 18, 1606, ed., M. S. Giuseppi, London (1940).

Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 19, 1607, eds., M. S. Giuseppi, D. McN. Lockie, London (1965).

Jointure for Dorothy now wife of William Selby. 20 December 1591. Berwick Record Office.

Journal of the House of Commons: Volume 1, 1547-162. London (1802).

Manuscripts of Selby and Selby-Bigge family of Ightham Mote. Kent History and Library Centre (U947).

Will of Dame Dorothie Selbie, Widow of Ightham, Kent. Proved 18 March 1642. The National Archives (PROB 11/188/358).

Will of Sir William Selbie of Ightham, Kent. Proved 05 February 1612. The National Archives (PROB 11/119/122).

Will of Sir William Selby of Ightham, Kent. Proved 20 February 1638. The National Archives (PROB 11/176/259).

Secondary Sources

Alford, S. ‘Some Elizabethan Spies in the Office of Sir Francis Walsingham’ in Adams. R., & Cox. R., Diplomacy and Early Modern Culture, Palgrave Macmillan UK (2010). Archbold, W.A.J., Paget, William, first Baron Paget of Beaudesert (1505–1563), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (1895).

Brooke, X., Tales in Thread, The Antique Collector (1990).

Clifford D. J. H., (ed) The Diaries of Lady Anne Clifford, The History Press (2003).[pg218]

Coates, H., Faction, Rhetoric, and Ideology: Sir Francis Walsingham’s Role in Anglo- Scottish Diplomacy, 1580–1590, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, 50:3 (2020).

Courtney, A. ‘The Secret Correspondence of James VI, 1601-3’, in Doran, S. & Kewes, P., Doubtful and dangerous: The question of the succession in late Elizabethan England, Manchester University Press (2014).

Cressy, D., Charles I and the people of England, Oxford University Press (2015).

Eales, J., Kent and the English Civil Wars 1640-1660, in Lansberry, F. (ed.) Government and Politics in Kent 1640-1914, Boydell and Brewer (2001), pp. 1-32.

Esdaile, K. A., Gunpowder Plot in Needlework: Dame Dorothy Selby, Whose Arte Disclos’d That Plot, County Life (18 June 1943), pp. 1094-1096.

Everitt, A., The Community of Kent and the Great Rebellions, Leicester University Press (1966).

Harrison, Sir. E., The Court Rolls and other records of the Manor of Ightham as a contribution to local history, Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 48 (1936).

Harrison, Sir. E., The Court Rolls and Other Records of the Manor of Ightham as a Contribution to Local History, second and final part, Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 49 (1937).

Hasler, P. W., The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, Vol. I, Intro- ductory Survey, Appendices, Constituencies, Members A-C, H.M. Stationery Office (1981). Hasler, P. W., The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, Vol. III, Members M-Z, H.M. Stationery Office (1981).

Holmes, P., ‘Paget, Thomas, fourth Baron Paget’ & Thompson Cooper, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004).

Holmes, P. Paget, Charles (d. 1612), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004).

Kishlansky, M., A Monarchy Transformed: Britain, 1603-1714, London, Penguin (1997).

Leach, P. & Rumley, P., Archaeological Studies Undertaken During Building Restoration Work, 1989 Onwards of Ightham Mote, Ivy Hatch, Kent. Volume 3: The East Range, 1994-1995, The North West Quarter, 1996-1997 (2004).

Newton, D., North-East England 1569-1625: Governance, Culture and Identity, Boydell Press (2006).

Nichols, J., The progresses, processions, and magnificent festivities, of King James the First, his royal consort, family, and court, collected from original manuscripts, scarce pamphlets, corporation records, parochial registers, &c., &c. Comprising forty masques and entertainments; ten civic pageants; numerous original letters; and annotated lists of the peers, baronets, and knights, who received those honours during the reign of King James, London. Printed by and for J. B. Nichols, printer to the Society of Antiquaries, 25, Parliament Street (1828).

Meikle, M. M., Lairds and gentlemen: a study of the landed families of the eastern Anglo- Scottish borders, c.1540-1603, University of Edinburgh (1988).

Meikle, M. M., Selby Family (c.1520-1646) Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2008).

Orlin, L. C., Lives in London Lodgings, Huntington Library Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 1., University of Pennsylvania Press (2008), pp. 219-242.

Spicer, A., God Will Have a House: Defining Sacred Space and Rites of Consecration in Early Seventeenth-Century England, in Sarah Hamilton & Andrew Spicer, Defining the holy: sacred space in medieval and early modern Europe, Ashgate (2005).

Stirk, S. & Williams, D., Ightham: At the Crossroads, red Court Publishing, Seal, Kent, England (2015).

Thrush, A. & Ferris, J. P., The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1604-1629. Published for the History of Parliament Trust by Cambridge University Press (2010).

[pg219]Watts S.J. & Watts S. J., From the Border to the Middle Shire: Northumberland 1586-1625, Leicester University Press (1975).

Endnotes

[fn]1|Maureen M. Meikle, ‘Selby Family (c.1520-1646), Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2008).[/fn]

[fn]2|William greenwell, Wills and Inventories from the Registry at Durham, vol. 2, Surtees Society, Durham (1860), pp. 256-258. & P. W. Hasler, The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, vol. III, Members M-Z, H.M. Stationery Office (1981), pp. 366-367.[/fn]

[fn]3|Meikle, ‘Selby Family’.[/fn]

[fn]4|William Selby to Walsingham. April 3, 1584 & From Border Papers volume 1, April 1584, in Calendar of Border Papers: Volume 1, 1560-95, Joseph Bain (ed.), London (1894), pp. 130-135.[/fn]

[fn]5|Sir John Selby to Walsingham. April 3, 1584, From ‘Border Papers volume 1: April 1584’, in Calendar of Border Papers, Volume 1, 1560-95, Joseph Bain (ed.), London (1894), pp. 130-135.[/fn]

[fn]6|Hannah Coates, Faction, Rhetoric, and Ideology: Sir Francis Walsingham’s Role in Anglo- Scottish Diplomacy, 1580–1590, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 50:3 (2020), p.29[/fn]

[fn]7|meikle, Lairds and gentlemen, pp. 199-200.[/fn]

[fn]8|Sir John Forster to Sec. Walsingham. Sir Cuthbert Collingwood. 20 December, 1586. Alnwick from ‘Addenda, Queen Elizabeth, Volume 29, December 1586’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Elizabeth, Addenda 1580-1625, Mary Anne Everett Green (ed.), London (1872), pp. 196-199.[/fn]

[fn]9|Sir John Selby to Walsingham. 3 August, 1588, Berwick from ‘Border Papers volume 1: August 1588’, in Calendar of Border Papers: Volume 1, 1560-95, Joseph Bain (ed.), London (1894), pp. 327-332.[/fn]

[fn]10|Sir John Selby to Walsingham. 3 August, 1588, Berwick from ‘Border Papers volume 1: August 1588’, in Calendar of Border Papers: Volume 1, 1560-95, Joseph Bain (ed.), London (1894), pp. 327-332.[/fn]

[fn]11|S. J. Watts & S. J. Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire: Northumberland 1586-1625, Leicester University Press (1975), p. 100.[/fn]

[fn]12|See figure 2: Portrait of Dorothy Bonham. In the manner of Marcus Gheeraerts, the Younger (1561-1635). Oil on panel, painted c.1588. Credit and thanks for the expertise and ideas of my colleagues, Amanda-Jane Doran and Rowena Willard-Wright, with whom we co-curated the ‘Selby Spies’ exhibition that ran at Ightham Mote the summer of 2024.[/fn]

[fn]13|diana Newton, North-East England 1569-1625: Governance, Culture and Identity, boydell Press (2006).[/fn]

[fn]14|Stephen Alford, ‘Some Elizabethan Spies in the Office of Sir Francis Walsingham’ in Adams, R. & Cox. R., Diplomacy and Early Modern Culture, London, Palgrave Macmillan (2010), pp. 47, 49.[/fn]

[fn]15|Jointure for Dorothy now wife of William Selby. 20 December 1591. Berwick Record Office.[/fn]

[fn]16|Lena Cowen Orlin, ‘Lives in London Lodgings’, Huntington Library Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 1. University of Pennsylvania Press (2008), pp. 227.[/fn]

[fn]17|Will of Sir William Selbie of Ightham, Kent. Proved 05 February 1612. PROB 11/119/122. The National Archives.[/fn]

[fn]18|Manuscripts of the Selby and Selby-Bigge Family of Ightham Mote. Kent Archives ( U947/ T2/1/E).[/fn]

[fn]19|Meikle, ‘Selby family’ & Meikle, Lairds and gentlemen, pp. 199-200.[/fn]

[fn]20|Sir edward harrison, ‘the Court rolls and other records of the manor of Ightham as a Contribution to Local History’, Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 49 (1937), p. 40.[/fn]

[fn]21|hasler, The History of Parliament, p. 366-367.[/fn]

[fn]22|Harrison, ‘Court Rolls and Other Records’ (1937), p. 32.[/fn]

[fn]23|Meikle, ‘Selby family’.[/fn]

[fn]24|William Selby to Lord Burghley. Berwick, 23 January 1597/8. ‘Cecil Papers: January 1598, 16- 31’, in Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, Volume 8, 1598, R. A. Roberts (ed.), London (1899), pp. 17-35.[/fn]

[fn]25|Hasler, The History of Parliament, pp. 366-368.[/fn]

[fn]26|Ibid., pp. 366-367.[/fn]

[fn]27|S. J. Watts & S. J. Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire: Northumberland 1586-1625, Leicester University Press (1975), p. 127.[/fn]

[fn]28|Hasler, The History of Parliament, pp. 367-368.[/fn]

[fn]29|Sir Edward Harrison, ‘The Court rolls and other records of the manor of Ightham as a contribution to Local History’, Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 48 (1936), p. 201.[/fn]

[fn]30|Hasler, The History of Parliament, pp. 366-368.[/fn]

[fn]31|Ibid., pp. 367-368.[/fn]

[fn]32|Alexander Courtney, ‘The Secret Correspondence of James VI, 1601-3’, in Susan Doran & Paulina Kewes, Doubtful and dangerous: The question of the succession in late Elizabethan England, Manchester University Press (2014), p. 136.[/fn]

[fn]33|Meikle, Lairds and gentlemen, p. 452.[/fn]

[fn]34|John Nichols, The progresses, processions, and magnificent festivities, of King James the First, his royal consort, family, and court, collected from original manuscripts, scarce pamphlets, corporation records, parochial registers, &c., &c. Comprising forty masques and entertainments; ten civic pageants; numerous original letters; and annotated lists of the peers, baronets, and knights, who received those honours during the reign of King James. London. Printed by and for J. B. Nichols, printer to the Society of Antiquaries, 25, Parliament Street (1828), p. 160.[/fn]

[fn]35|Newton, North-East England, 1569-1625, p. 67.[/fn]

[fn]36|‘James I: Volume 12, January-February, 1605’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: James I, 1603-1610, Mary Anne Everett Green (ed.), London (1857), pp.185-200.[/fn]

[fn]37|Watts & Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire, p. 140[/fn]

[fn]38|‘James I: Volume 6, January-March, 1604’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: James I, 1603-1610, Mary Anne Everett Green (ed.), London (1857), pp. 64-90.[/fn]

[fn]39|Watts &. Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire, pp. 135.[/fn]

[fn]40|Hasler, The History of Parliament, pp. 367-368.[/fn]

[fn]41|Sir William Selby to the Earl of Salisbury. 21 August 1605. From ‘Cecil Papers: August 1605, 16-31’, in Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House: Volume 17, 1605, ed. M S Giuseppi, London (1938), pp. 374-409.[/fn]

[fn]42|Thrush & Ferris, The History of Parliament, 1604-1629.[/fn]

[fn]43|‘House of Commons Journal Volume 1, in Journal of the House of Commons: Volume 1, 1547- 1629, London (1802), p. 356.[/fn]

[fn]44|Will of Sir William Selbie of Ightham, Kent. Proved 05 February 1612. The National Archives. (PROB 11/119/122).[/fn]

[fn]45|Hasler, The History of Parliament, 1559-1603, pp. 366-367.[/fn]

[fn]46|Harrison, ‘Court Rolls and Other Records’ (1937), p. 40.[/fn]

[fn]47|Watts & Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire, p. 182.[/fn]

[fn]48|The Diaries of Lady Anne Clifford, eds., David. J. H. Clifford, The History Press (2003), p. 67.[/fn]

[fn]49|The connection with Lady Anne Clifford is significant. Richard Spence in Lady Anne Clifford (Sutton, 1997) p. 38 suggests that William Selby would have already been known to Lady Anne, because he was a Northumbrian and one of her father’s former associates on the borders. In the diaries (Spence, Diaries (Sutton, 1990), p. 36), Lady Anne also records that on hearing of her mother’s death, she asked William about the conveyance of her mother’s body to Northumberland and the building of a chapel there. At the same time, she records that Dorothy told her that she had heard people say that Anne had done well in not agreeing to the composition for her inheritance. This further illustrates the intimacy between the two women and the importance of elite female networks to both Dorothy and Anne.[/fn]

[fn]50|Diaries of Lady Anne Clifford, Clifford (ed.), pp. 36, 76, 84.[/fn]

[fn]51|Jean Stirk & David Williams, Ightham: At the Crossroads, red Court Publishing, Seal, Kent, England (2015), p. 94.[/fn]

[fn]52|Esdaile, ‘Gunpowder Plot in Needlework’, pp. 1094-1096.[/fn]

[fn]53|The family tradition that Dorothy revealed the Gunpowder Plot by writing a letter would benefit from more context. The confusion seems to have arisen from a reading of her epitaph in Ightham church – especially the words ‘whose Art disclosed that Plot’. The art here being her needlework referred to in the article and not letter writing. Sir Edward Harrison published a short note in Archaeologia Cantiana, vol. 42 (1930), explaining this.[/fn]

[fn]54|Xanthe Brooke, ‘Tales in Thread’, The Antique Collector (1990), pp. 121. One of these is in the collections of the Lady Lever Art Gallery in Port Sunlight (See Armada: The Official Catalogue (National Maritime Museum, 1988, p. 283).[/fn]

[fn]55|Mark Kishlansky, A Monarchy Transformed: Britain, 1603-1714, London, Penguin (1997), pp. 106-107.[/fn]

[fn]56|Hasler, The History of Parliament, pp. 367-368.[/fn]

[fn]57|‘Charles I, volume 229: Undated 1632’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I, 1631-3, John Bruce (ed.), London (1862), pp. 471-495.[/fn]

[fn]58|An entry in the Register of Bancroft records the consecration of a chapel at Ightham Mote on 13 October 1633. Lambeth Palace Library (Reg Laud 1, ff. 190v-191r).[/fn]

[fn]59|Leach & Rumley, Archaeological Studies Volume 3, pp. 17-19.[/fn]

[fn]60|‘The state of Northumberland for religion in the principal families, by whom the multitude may safely be led in matter of religion or other action.’ 8 January 1606 in ‘Cecil Papers: January 1607, 1-15’, in Calendar of the Cecil Papers in Hatfield House, Volume 19, 1607, M S Giuseppi, D McN. Lockie (eds), London (1965), pp. 1-10.[/fn]

[fn]61|Andrew Spicer, ‘God Will Have a House’: Defining Sacred Space and Rites of Consecration in Early Seventeenth-Century England’ in Sarah Hamilton & Andrew Spicer, Defining the holy sacred space in medieval and early modern Europe, Ashgate (2005), p. 209.[/fn]

[fn]62|Alan Everitt, The Community of Kent and the Great Rebellions, Leicester University Press (1966) p. 194.[/fn]

[fn]63|David Cressy, Charles I and the people of England, Oxford University Press (2015), p. 9.[/fn]

[fn]64|‘Charles I - volume 302: November 18-30, 1635’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I, 1635, John Bruce (ed.), London (1865), pp. 486-519.[/fn]

[fn]65|‘Charles I - volume 388: April 18-30, 1638’, in Calendar of State Papers Domestic: Charles I, 1637-8 John Bruce (ed.), London (1869), pp. 370-392.[/fn]

[fn]66|Watts & Watts, From the Border to the Middle Shire, p. 140.[/fn]

[fn]67|Spicer, ‘God Will Have a House’, p. 219.[/fn]

[fn]68|Jackie Eales, ‘Kent and the English Civil Wars, 1640-1660’ in, Lansberry, F. (ed.) Government and Politics in Kent 1640-1914, Boydell and Brewer. (2001), p. 8.[/fn]

[fn]69|Will of Sir William Selby of Ightham, Kent. Proved 20 February 1638. The National Archives (PROB 11/176/259).[/fn]

[fn]70|Will of Sir William Selby of Ightham, Kent. Proved 20 February 1638. The National Archives (PROB 11/176/259).[/fn]

[fn]71|Will of Dame Dorothie Selbie, Widow of Ightham, Kent. Proved 18 March 1642. The National Archives (PROB 11/188/358).[/fn][pg222]